Co-Authors: Guillem Perutxet Olesti, Jingyuan Meng, Viktoria Viktorija.
Robotics and automation have been integrated into construction and architecture to significantly improve precision and efficiency, enabling the creation of intricate and innovative designs that were once considered unfeasible. This integration not only promotes safer construction environments but also leads to sustainable building practices and a surge in architectural innovation.
In the field of architectural higher education and research, robotics serves as a tool for experimentation. However, the transfer of this knowledge has often been unstructured and ad-hoc, leading to an incomplete understanding of the subject matter and impairing the learner’s ability to apply their skills in professional or academic contexts.
To address these challenges, we have introduced a credited skills module, ‘Architectural Robotics‘ in the Design for Manufacture master’s programmes at the Bartlett. We explain how complex robotics concepts are made accessible within the architectural context through a credited skills module. We will also detail our assessment methods, designed to challenge students’ comprehension of these concepts.
Challenges
At B-made (Bartlett Manufacturing and Design Exchange), our multidisciplinary team is dedicated to providing a manufacturing-focused education within a design-centric framework to students at the Bartlett School of Architecture (BSA). For over a decade, B-made has maintained a diverse array of robots, each with unique specifications to tackle challenges in architectural manufacturing and construction. These robots have become a vital tool for students across various undergraduate and postgraduate programmes, which includes Architecture BArch, Architecture MArch, Architectural Computation, Architectural Design, Bio-Integrated Design, Design for Manufacture, Design for Performance and Interaction to name a few. Additionally, students from other departments, such as Civil Engineering and Geomatic Engineering (CEGE) and Mechanical Engineering (MEng), have expressed interest in not only accessing the robotic equipment but also knowledge transfer and technical support from our facility.
Currently, we have an average of 50 short duration users (enrolled in weeklong workshops/ event) and 25 long term users (developing research and academic projects over a year) which comprise of students, researchers, and academics. Robotics is predominantly used for prototyping purposes, such as advanced non-planar 3D printing, multi-axis machining, 6DOF sheet forming, complex assembly.
Despite the widespread use of robotics in these programmes, there is a notable absence of credited academic modules specifically tailored for robotics learning in their curriculum. This gap presents a significant challenge, as mastering robotics involves a steep learning curve, encompassing robotic programming, operational skills, and the application of design principles to robotic manufacturing processes. Although programming and operational skills have been successfully established through blended learning in the B-made Robots Course (UCL Education Conference 2021, UCL Education Conference 2022, UCL Education Conference 2023), the integration of applied robotic skills within the realm of design remains unstructured.
The lack of structured robotics education in the curriculum leads to several issues. It hinders the integration of robotics into research, resulting in a lack of new research findings, innovative approaches, and significant progress in the project. Additionally, students’ access to and use of robotics is often reactive, triggered by specific needs during the design exploration phase. This ad hoc approach is problematic; without dedicated time and emphasis on robotics learning and skill development within their design research, students struggle to fully leverage this technology.
Therefore, we have reevaluated how the study of robotics is implemented into the BSA curriculum to ensure that students can effectively utilize these tools and incorporate them into their academic and research work. This has been achieved through the development of a credit module. As a leading initiative, we have designed and developed a comprehensive 15-credit module (equivalent to 150 hours of combined teaching and learning), which has been integrated into the Design for Manufacture (DFM) master’s programme.
Module Design
The aim of the module is to enable students to comprehend the role of robotics, assess the benefits of its implementation, and effectively incorporate robotic technology into the design and construction processes. Understanding the ongoing research at the DFM programme, robotic timber assembly process was identified, and a workshop-based module was designed and conducted. The workshop was conducted for 5 days. The workshop’s primary objective was for students to design and construct an architectural wall prototype using small-scale timber blocks, assembled by a robot. This task required developing a structure that showcased novelty in its design complexity, achievable only through the precision and robot 6 Degrees of Freedom (DOF) navigability in the three-dimensional (3D) space. Intelligent component aggregation strategies, which consider path-planning concepts such as assembly direction and sequence, were required to achieve design complexity.
On the first day, students were introduced to the robotic process and workflow, including computational design, robotic programming, and operation through a sample wall design. The second day challenged them to design their own walls, taking into account manufacturing constraints such as robot reachability, workspace limitations, and potential collisions, while also addressing structural or environmental challenges.
The third day was dedicated to the construction of their designs using the robotic arm, where students faced discrepancies between their digital designs and physical realities. Issues such as design errors, calibration, inaccuracies in timber blocks, and gravity’s impact on structural stability were encountered. On the fourth day, insights gained from these challenges were integrated into their designs. Students refined their understanding of the workflow, optimizing various parameters and criteria. The final day culminated in the successful construction of their final large-scale prototypes, along with a comprehensive presentation of their learning process.
Learning Outcomes and Assessments
The workshop not only imparted technical skills in robotics but also encouraged critical thinking and problem-solving in the context of architectural design and construction. Students learned how robotic constraints significantly impact design decisions and how to navigate these through control and optimization techniques. Students were encouraged to reflect on design and assembly processes, considering how they could be refined for future improvements. They also identified potential applications within the Architectural, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry where the robotic assembly process could be most beneficial, specifically in scenarios that leverage the unique capabilities of robotic precision and efficiency. An understanding of the manufacturing scope was established, pinpointing the value added by robotic involvement.
Students learned to identify and list necessary tools and ancillary equipment for AEC processes, and to design the manufacturing setup and workspace, visualized through diagrams. Lastly, they examined design parameters and evaluation criteria for the AEC process, learning to map the interplay between these factors to optimize outcomes. Following the completion of the workshop and presentation, the students were asked to submit a portfolio which demonstrated the key learning. The quality of the documentation was considered, focusing on the descriptiveness and reflectiveness with which students recorded their workflow. Each stage and iteration of the making process was accounted for, reflecting the students’ ability to evolve their project in response to continuous learning and problem-solving. Moreover, students’ abilities to integrate manufacturing and material constraints into their designs were critical in the assessment. These elements of the assessment aimed to encapsulate not only the final results but also the students’ developmental journey throughout the module.
Impact and Future
This module has successfully created a structured educational pathway, specifically designed for the DFM programme, enhances the students’ skills and enables quick advancement of their research within the course. The workshop’s principles are designed to be material-agnostic regarding robotic assembly, illustrating that the core concepts can be applied broadly. Just as 3d printing falls under the umbrella of additive manufacturing, regardless of whether clay, metal, or plastic is used, machining is a form of subtractive manufacturing, demonstrating the versatility of the learning model. The next step is identifying how this learning can be accredited to meet specific skills and knowledge that align with professional demands of current industry. We hope that this module will serve as a successful model for other programmes to adapt into their curriculum.
Credits:
Students: Bingbing Fan, Chin-Lun Lu, Felix KL, Hakyeong Jeon, Hila Sharabi, Huang Zixun, Jawad Soueid, Jianing Li, Jiapan Sun, Latifah Almohiza, Matias Ramirez, Pengfei Zhang, Pingle Chen, PJ Ping-Chieh, Liu, Rixi Ye, Ruoxi Li, Shixian Bao, Tianyi Xu, Victoria Arancibia Retes, Yu Li, Yuk Ying Ho, Yuxuan Liu, Zhenghao Zhu.
Workshop Support: Hamish Veitch, Mark Burrows
Skills Tutors: Guillem Perutxet Olesti, Pradeep Devadass
Skills Coordinator: Viktoria Viktorija
Programme Director: Peter Scully